In general, do you prefer early or late variants?

[Adam Poultney]

I think my bias towards early Vulcans is somewhat well known here, and that bias towards early variants extends to other aircraft like the Buccaneer S.1, Victor B1 and early B.Mk.2, early (Mk.I-V) Spitfires, early Do17s (especially the E and F variants), Sea Vixen FAW.1 and Phantom FG.1. However I do also think some aircraft looked better in their later variants, such as the cancelled Nimrod MRA4 or the later variants of the Gloster Javelin. 

Does anyone else think aircraft generally look better in their early variants before they have aerials, pods, larger engines, and other lumps and bumps stuck on them, or maybe the opposite and you prefer the look of a well matured design like the Spitfire Mk.22 or Victor K2?

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

A bit of both really. I think ships generally looked better in their earlier forms before major refits and things like that. Cars tend to look better before so-called "facelifts". I'm not sure I could choose between a Spitfire Mk.Ia, Mk.VIII or a clipped wing low back XIV as far as looks go - they're all good in different ways. I don't much care for the P-51A, I don't mind the B/C, I do like the D/K and I think the H looks like a weird bloated thing. In summary, I'm all over the place as far as this question is concerned!

 

[Swamp Donkey]

I’m generally with Jamie on this, and have no hard and fast rule. I do like the later Griffon engine Spitfires, but on the other hand have a real soft spot for early Harriers. Tall tail B52’s every day of the week, but later versions of MiG 21’s - see, I’m all over the place!

 

SD

[Giorgio N]

Same as above, no set rules here. Some aircraft types look better to me in their early variants, others look better in their later. Some types showed the purest lines in their early forms, others really got their best look at the end of their career.

When it comes to building models the schemes used also matter so with some types I often go for the later variants because these were the ones more widely used (think Hunter or F-104) and therefore give more opportunities in terms of colour schemes, with other types the earlier variants wore more interesting colour schemes so I may chose them for this reason.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

I agree with most here. Some looked better early on, some were better once improved 

[Mr T]

I also agree with most of the posters so far, although my favourite Spitfires are the Mk22 and 24 and their Seafire equivalents. With me it is more the type rather than the mark. Thus a new model of any mark of Venom or Halifax would arouse my interest much more than almost anything German as I am not really interested in Luftwaffe stuff at all. 

[One 48]

Early Spitfires, 109's and Harriers for me every time.

[SAT69]

Late Sabres over the early models. F-86H rocks!

[Graham Boak]

Yet there's no Spitfire nicer than a Mk.VIII (without pointy wingtip), and the sleekest 109s are the F and early G.  Middle period wins. on those.  Later Zeros do look better then early ones, ditto Halifaxes.  Early Hunters and Mosquitos.  Late Comets but early Constellations.  Phantom wins hands down on being equally ugly in all versions.

[lasermonkey]

Generally, I’d say earlier versions. For me, there’s nothing made by humankind that is more beautiful than a Spitfire Mk I. I also think the Hurricane Mk I is the best looking. The Mosquito is another aeroplane that I think has better looking earlier versions, especially the B.IV. As for the Beaufighter, the Mk I is also my favourite in terms of looks.

 

Where my argument falls down is with a couple of German types. To me, the best looking Fw 190 is the D series and with the Bf 109, I think the G-10 and K-4 look better. I find the E somewhat agricultural looking. 
 

And as for Mustangs, it has to be the Merlin engined variants. 

[RidgeRunner]

For me it varies. When considering, for example, Sabres I'd go with the Canadair Sabre series and the H model. So early in that instance. It is was to be F-104s I love them all, particularly the TFs. So, I dont think it is a consistent thing

 

Martin

 

[Tzulscha]

I think I prefer the earliest version of whatever I'm building.

A Spitfire Mk XXII is a pretty plane, no question, but there is something in the unrefined, raw lines of a watts prop, flat canopy, Mk I Spit that does it for me.

The A-36 Apache or Allison engined P-51A, is more interesting to me than a P-51K.

 

I also like prototypes that may have never made it past that stage.

Something about being closer to the genesis of a machine I suppose. Closer to the designers original ideas...

 

Now, if I had to take one of these things into combat, I would definitely want the latest and greatest.

[Ray S]

I don't think I really mind, each type looks great in some way, shape or form, you just have to look for it.

 

Except in EE Lightnings, where every version is brilliant, in my opinion (including all of the prototypes)

 

Ray

[3DStewart]

Generally later variants, simply because they are usually 'better' than what went before them: faster, stronger, better armed, more aerodynamic, more reliable, whatever.

[MrB17]

Being a late model myself, I would prefer early haha.

Seriously if it has lines like a Spitfire, they’re all beautiful. Early B-17’s like the Y1B-17 or B-17B look their age but have a slightly steam punk feel which is nice, B-17C/D not so much, B-17F is my favourite of the line, and early G’s are nice, the late G with the stubby Cheyenne tail, not my favourite. B-24’s what can I say, beautiful wing, butt ugly fuselage, so it doesn’t matter to me. I detest 190D’s, but love 190A’s. I’m a tall tail B-52 guy all the way. Prefer the early B-36’s without the jet pods, Early C-130’s with the Roman nose look odd to me. Then take the Mosquito, a damn fine looking aircraft except when someone has the brainstorm to stick a greenhouse on the nose! Some aircraft look better as designed, while others definitely need a facelift. 
The key is to build what tickles your fancy and leave the rest for those who love them.

 

Cheers

Jeff

 

[upnorth]

I try not to pick favorites, but often I find favorites in the middle of a range. Sometimes the early versions look a bit to minimal and late versions look like the manufacturer went to the well one to many times with a design.

 

For example, the Lightning F.3 is my favorite member of that family. I don't care for the rounded tail tip of the early models nor the monsterous belly tank of the latter ones, but the squared of fin tip and smaller belly tank of the F.3 hits the balance just right.

 

With Harriers, I like the purposeful look of the Gr.3 for the early ones and the smoother look of the Gr.5 for the later ones.

[fatfingers]

Being a bit of a tank nut, i always preferred the look of the early PzIV over the later models with the shurtzen and longer gun etc. Also think the PzIII is more asthetically pleasing in its earlier versions with the shorter 37 and 50mm guns. Same with Shermans. Always had a preference for the M4A1 (75 or 76mm gun version) with its curvy upper hull over the M4A3E8 etc. As for the Isreali conversions... those ( with apologies to @Bullbasket ) are just plug ugly! 🤣

 

Regards,

 

Steve

[Bullbasket]

4 minutes ago, fatfingers said:

As for the Isreali conversions... those ( with apologies to @Bullbasket ) are just plug ugly! 🤣

Arrrgggghh!! The heresy in that statement is punishable by making you build wingy things for the rest of your life!!

I think that it's the ugliness of a subject which attracts me. When I built aircraft, one subject attracted me more than any other, and that was The F4 Phantom, which has often been described as being ugly (although I disagree).

When it comes to AFV's, 99 times out of a hundred, I like the early versions and the later ones. As far as Shermans are concerned, everything from "Michael" right up to and including the Chilean M60 are fine by me. Much the same with aircraft. A Mk.1 Spitfire with a two blade prop is just as attractive to me as a Seafire FR.47 (or a Spiteful or a Seafang). So basically, my answer to the original question is.....neither.

 

John Mordechai Bullbasket.

[Tojo72]

Doesn't really matter to me,if an aircraft catches my eye I will build it,depends on its look from a/c to a/c

[IanHx]

Varies by subject -  Harrier GR9 over GR3,  but F/A-18 C  over  F/A-18E.

[noelh]

Hmm very interesting question. Like  others,  it depends. Spitfire and Hurricane Mk Is. Yes. Shermans? Late models. Mosquito, early models. F4 Phantoms, late models. F4U Corsairs, literally no preference. P51, yes the D/K models.

 

The aeroplane I fly most? Early, since then they've fitted and ugly three blade prop and a fat nosewheel. It wasn't a pretty aeroplane to start with but they've made it worse. 

 

The F16, early or late they still look good.